MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3128231445

Faire valoir ses droits à la chambre de la jeunesse : état des lieux des barrières structurelles à l’accès à la justice des familles

2019· article· fr· W3128231445 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emmanuelle Bernheim, Marilyn Coupienne

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

S’il est convenu que l’intervention en protection de la jeunesse constitue en soi une atteinte aux droits fondamentaux des parents, il est souvent pris pour acquis que les droits des parents et des enfants s’opposent autour de notions telles que l’intérêt supérieur de l’enfant et le projet de vie permanent. Au Québec, dans un contexte où les mères vivant dans la pauvreté, et plus particulièrement les mères autochtones ou issues de minorités visibles, sont surreprésentées en protection de la jeunesse et où le nombre de dossiers judiciarisés a cru de 20% depuis les années 1990, il apparaît non seulement pertinent mais nécessaire de documenter les conditions d’accès à la justice des parents à la Chambre de la jeunesse.\nLa recherche documentaire permet de documenter la présence de barrières structurelles en matière d’accès à la justice des parents, plus particulièrement des barrières juridiques, matérielles, objectives et relatives aux inégalités. Ainsi, tant le droit applicable que la pratique constituent des obstacles susceptibles de compliquer la revendication des droits des parents. Alors que les familles vivant dans la pauvreté sont surreprésentées en protection de la jeunesse, ces constats soulèvent des questions sur la capacité du système judiciaire à traiter des enjeux sociaux de manière égalitaire.\nWhile it is agreed that intervention in child protection constitutes in itself an infringement of the fundamental rights of parents, it is often taken for granted that the rights of parents and children are in conflict around concepts such as the best interests of the child and the permanent life project. In Quebec, in a context where mothers living in poverty, and more particularly Aboriginal or visible minority mothers, are overrepresented in youth protection and where the number of court cases has increased by 20% since the 1990s, it appears not only relevant but necessary to document the conditions of access to justice for parents in the Youth Chamber.\nDocumentary research makes it possible to document the presence of structural barriers in terms of parents’ access to justice, more specifically legal, material, objective, and inequality barriers. Thus, both the applicable law and the practice constitute obstacles liable to complicate the claim of parental rights. While families living in poverty are overrepresented in youth protection, these findings raise questions about the capacity of the justice system to deal with social issues in an egalitarian manner.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)→Same topicEducation, sociology, and vocational training→French-language works237,207→